MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6912182573 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14988475

Ephippiorthoceras Foerste 1924

2025· article· en· W6912182573 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenusOblique caseType speciesPosition (finance)Head (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genus Ephippiorthoceras Foerste, 1924 Type species Orthoceras formosum Billings, 1857, from English Head, Anticosti Island, Quebec, Canada, English Head formation, zone 3 or 4 (Foerste 1928c) (= Vauréal Formation, see Achab et al. 2011), late Katian; by original designation. Diagnosis Orthocones with circular to slightly compressed conch cross section; smooth or ornamented with fine transverse and /or longitudinal striae and lirae or coarse oblique plications; sutures form distinct broad lateral lobes; siphuncle subcentral to central, cyrtochoanitic septal necks; siphuncular segments expanded slendering adorally, parietal endosiphuncular deposits occur. (Compiled from Flower 1962, and Sweet 1964c.) Remarks Flower (1962: 33) assigned Ephippiorthoceras into his newly erected Proteoceratidae and justified it, without being more specific, among other arguments with the comment “other material indicates adoral slendering of the segments of the siphuncle.” Sweet (1964c: K256) assigned the genus with question into the Proteoceratidae and remarked that: “Details of the interior are not known in the type-species […] Ephippiorthocras is probably a pseudorthoceratid rather than a proteoceratid.” The material described herein suggests that Flower’s (1962) original evaluation was correct. In the Estonian specimens, a clear tendency for proteoceratid-like “slendering” is apparent. Moreover, the position of the siphuncle becomes more eccentric in later growth stages (see below).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils→French-language works237,207→